surreal1272

First Point: Yeah, you read it all right....and helped to close the thread too. I think you hold the record for locked threads over at MT. Congrats on that btw. And why should I answer someones question about if I have driven the car, when they clearly said that because they did not know there was a review already? I was clearly......CLEARLY.....talking about the MT comparison. Second Point: And way to step up with facts surreal. Here is a fact, my point about refinement was spot on.....per the MT comparison. And yeah, MT stated they wanted the car with more performance. Does that really surprise anyone? And my final point was that Mustangs problem is easily fixed with more power and gears. Which it is. GM can't just throw more power at it's brand new camaro failings. You are welcome. So three questions and three dodged and completely side stepped answers and on top of that, you throw in a personal jab that has not ONE THING to do with this topic. I do love how you think only Ford can fix their issues when they have had ten years since the last real Mustang redesign, to outperform the Camaro. You would be wrong but it's funny that you think that. Oh and Drew, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say that we should keep the MT drama out of here? All I know is that I don't let a magazine decide how I want to feel about subjective things like refinement, hence why he was asked by three different people if he had actually sat in and driven the Camaro. My only point here, that you can't seem to argue against, is that MT stated Mustang was the better all around car. Now, if you want to debate that, I am all about that. Stay focused surreal. Focus yourself and answer the original question asked by three different people. Have you sat in and driven the new Camaro?

Anyway, we will see if Ford can correct the performance shortcomings on the Mustang. It's obviously a good car but the Camaro has clearly set the performance bar here.

First Point: Yeah, you read it all right....and helped to close the thread too. I think you hold the record for locked threads over at MT. Congrats on that btw. And why should I answer someones question about if I have driven the car, when they clearly said that because they did not know there was a review already? I was clearly......CLEARLY.....talking about the MT comparison. Second Point: And way to step up with facts surreal. Here is a fact, my point about refinement was spot on.....per the MT comparison. And yeah, MT stated they wanted the car with more performance. Does that really surprise anyone? And my final point was that Mustangs problem is easily fixed with more power and gears. Which it is. GM can't just throw more power at it's brand new camaro failings. You are welcome. So three questions and three dodged and completely side stepped answers and on top of that, you throw in a personal jab that has not ONE THING to do with this topic. I do love how you think only Ford can fix their issues when they have had ten years since the last real Mustang redesign, to outperform the Camaro. You would be wrong but it's funny that you think that. Oh and Drew, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say that we should keep the MT drama out of here? All I know is that I don't let a magazine decide how I want to feel about subjective things like refinement, hence why he was asked by three different people if he had actually sat in and driven the Camaro.

I've read the article in question. Who won that btw? It wasn't the Mustang, is all I know. BTW, nice dodge of the original questions asked by several people here, which was "have you driven the new Camaro?". Oh but those sales (once again only counting them when it suits you), never mind the fact that the production of those "unloaded" Camaros was greatly reduced over the last six months, which is exactly what happened to the Mustang last year when it sold a whopping 3200 cars in September 2014 alone.

It can be done though. The last gen Camaro was a heavy beast compared to the Stang but offered similar and sometimes better performance in some trims. We will see what Ford does over the next few years.

Sales are not the topic of discussion here though (as you like to point out in other threads).Thanks for down vote on the facts again (and this time no one can use perceived condescension as an excuse). Nice to know that some save those one a day votes for just such an occasion. Votes aren't the topic of discussion here ( as you like to point out, in this thread ). Maybe you didn't notice this, but I merely replied to my own post. I would have edited the post in question but it was too late. Thanks for your concern though. Anyway, back to the topic, Ford has some work to do in the performance arena because the Camaro is clearly not playing around this time.

Sales are not the topic of discussion here though (as you like to point out in other threads). Thanks for down vote on the facts again (and this time no one can use perceived condescension as an excuse). Nice to know that some save those one a day votes for just such an occasion.

Sales are not the topic of discussion here though (as you like to point out in other threads).

I know right? So silly to focus on engines and trannys on a performance car.

So you have sat in and driven the new Camaro? I mean the only way I can make such an assessment is if I've done that very thing myself. Otherwise, I could not make an honest assessment about it.

DUDE! I thought I was the only one who digs on that song! Great show and an awesome song! Just love the tone of it!

Why can't people like more than one thing? I'm an Oldsmobile guy, but my secret love is the old Eagle Talon. I had two '95 Talons (two separate times of course). They were both great cars.

Probably. GM has made some of the worst gaskets over the years. My wife's old 3.4L Grand Am had gasket issues.

Yeah it's a mess that seems to be due to some old school incompetence on the part of some long gone idiots. Hopefully a true fix will happen this time.

Since there's been over 1300 fires since last recall, one can say GM is not being proactive at all. It's not different than the almost twenty years of Ford cruise control issues, some issued more than four times for certain models. GM is going beyond the need considering a big chunk of these models are almost 20 years old. http://www.lieffcabraser.com/Personal-Injury/Car-Accidents/Ford-Cruise-Control-Switch-Fires.shtml http://www.autosafety.org/ford-cruise-control-deactivation-switch-recalls-and-history Wrong thread. This has NOTHING to do with Ford. Correct thread because it was made to illustrate the relative nature of the term "pro active" and how competing companies handle repeat issues.

Since there's been over 1300 fires since last recall, one can say GM is not being proactive at all. It's not different than the almost twenty years of Ford cruise control issues, some issued more than four times for certain models. GM is going beyond the need considering a big chunk of these models are almost 20 years old. http://www.lieffcabraser.com/Personal-Injury/Car-Accidents/Ford-Cruise-Control-Switch-Fires.shtml http://www.autosafety.org/ford-cruise-control-deactivation-switch-recalls-and-history Point being "pro-active" is a relative term in this case.

For me, I would still prefer a Challenger for the simple fact that is has the same amount of front cabin space as my Magnum (a big plus for me). I'm not a big guy but at 5'10" and 215 lbs. with a bad back, the Stang and Camaro would not do me any favors in the overall driving comfort department. Still, it's a great time to be a fan of cars while they are still able to put out performance models like these two, CAFE be damned.

I'm not assuming. Read the article. He straight-up says it: "Get in a fifth-generation Camaro (even the SS 1LE), and you're reminded constantly that you're sacrificing for performance. In the Mustang, not so." As for why he never used the '16 Camaro as a comparison point, I have a theory. It's called, because the comparo showed how dominant the Alpha Camaro is. "I haven't gotten to read a comparion yet(not going to read pictures somebody posted), on what grounds did the mustang lose?" All of them, pretty much. But you'll have to read the pictures to see. "I'm not trying to justify that the Mustang is a better car all around or this or that but you're the only person who is attempting to make the Mustang look bad." -uh... Once again, read the pictures. And don't try to make me out to be the only guy taking potshots at the thing. The Interwebs are ablaze with scathing criticism. Styles and tone vary, but the general consensus is that Ford just got royally panted, with no real fix in sight. Literally from that article (since some did not bother to read it before commenting). "The interior is nice, too. Get in a fifth-generation Camaro (even the SS 1LE), and you're reminded constantly that you're sacrificing for performance." It was a stupid comparison to make with the 2016 coming out and the 2015 no longer in production. And again someone down votes the facts. Fact is that right now, while the Mustang GT is a good car and serves it's purpose well, it falls short in the performance department against a now much leaner and meaner Camaro SS. Neither will have a problem selling in big numbers though and it's a great time to be a fan of these cars.

Nothing flies like a Mustang people! https://www.yahoo.com/autos/owner-hears-kaboom-finds-a-ford-mustang-on-roof-014428551.html Just trying to lighten the mood btw

That "completely" stripped Camaro has more standard options than the Mustang.

I'm not assuming. Read the article. He straight-up says it: "Get in a fifth-generation Camaro (even the SS 1LE), and you're reminded constantly that you're sacrificing for performance. In the Mustang, not so." As for why he never used the '16 Camaro as a comparison point, I have a theory. It's called, because the comparo showed how dominant the Alpha Camaro is. "I haven't gotten to read a comparion yet(not going to read pictures somebody posted), on what grounds did the mustang lose?" All of them, pretty much. But you'll have to read the pictures to see. "I'm not trying to justify that the Mustang is a better car all around or this or that but you're the only person who is attempting to make the Mustang look bad." -uh... Once again, read the pictures. And don't try to make me out to be the only guy taking potshots at the thing. The Interwebs are ablaze with scathing criticism. Styles and tone vary, but the general consensus is that Ford just got royally panted, with no real fix in sight. Literally from that article (since some did not bother to read it before commenting). "The interior is nice, too. Get in a fifth-generation Camaro (even the SS 1LE), and you're reminded constantly that you're sacrificing for performance." It was a stupid comparison to make with the 2016 coming out and the 2015 no longer in production.

There's a pretty big number comparison that you just "conveniently" left out and that's the difference in figure-8 times. 25.0 for the '13 and 24.4 for the '16. That is a very good indication of how much the handling has improved over the previous generation."It's not just about straight-line performance and highway pulls anymore. Muscle cars have entered the era of handling." "If you're searching for every last tenth of an advantage on paper, you may find something that's faster than the 2016 Ford Mustang GT. Maybe something cheaper. But if you enjoy the experience as much as the performance, the Mustang GT is the whole package, with an exhaust that's muscular when exercised, a controlled ride, and an interior you don't have to make excuses for." I'd be a lot more interested in that quote if:-I didn't know the Mustang lost its first comparo to the Camaro already-in the same publication that wrote this, -the interior they're praising was being compared to the Zeta Camaro (a '15), not the Alpha. The Camaro is just too strong. That article was very half baked. Bringing up the interior of a car no longer in production was just pointless. Compare it to the 2016 to achieve some relevance next time.

Um...didn't misunderstand it at all but I can agree to disagree. No worries ocn.

Actually, preferences of a target customer can be different for even two makes that produce highly similar products that can be easily substituted. So there is no nickel and diming. It all depends on what a brand is trying to achieve. Potentially, nickel and diming, could also apply to a large increase in base price even with a large increase in standard equipment. But in terms of these two coupes, what they deliver at the price they are at, it's pretty safe to say no one is being ripped off really; in comparison to other similar powered coupes that cost much, much more. Well said. That was pretty much my point from the get go.

Some information regarding Tesla and their certifications (from 2014) http://www.fenderbender.com/FenderBender/March-2014/Testing-Tesla-Certification/